this is a critically important region in the united states. and the key factor is central in this policy is china's rise and how the united states will manage china's rise going forward. >> how does china's rise look, camille, when you're standing in manila. is the country looking to tighten itself to the united states because a politically, powerful china makes it feel insecure? >> you can see that the philippines may be insecure, but we are just admitting that our military capabilities are limited, and it's challenged, and so having the united states there as a key ally, one of our oldest allies, really, gives us more confidence. facing china, however, we see--we look at it as david versus goliath. we have elevated the government has elevated the case through the al jazeera america arbitration course through the hague, there is a case there right now on the south china sea dispute. having the united states support this measurement is something that the people really appreciate, the public and the government, that they have a backer some how.

between europe and the united states. without getting too detailed and too involved in the role of the law. i can say from an economic perspective and a relationship a business perspective it's clearly an inincredibly important tool. and allows far huge amount of trade and important relationships that consumers benefit from and that businesses benefit from. and it became a target in the conversation. i started to say in september and i said just last week if it was an easy target but wasn't the right target. if we want to focus on government surveillance issues we should. or happening through rules or adequacy determination or any other mechanisms for cross-border transfers. that is where the conversation should have happen around the appropriate scope of government surveillance. what i've noticed and frankly the e.u. commission issued report on first step in the report on safe harbor. and i think that this conversation i've been engaged in as well as others. i don't want to say i'm the only one. it seems to have gained r

states is for islamic extremists and so i think the united states citizens have gotten what they've paid for when they because we've been able to for you all and prevent numerous attacks on the continental united states and in europe with some of our allies because we're spending so much more money on intelligence and because we're able to have a more capable intelligence service going after threats to our country well you just mentioned nine eleven and that was of course twelve years ago but if we consider the. funding that the cia has requested of the intelligence community or rather has requested for the fiscal year of two thousand and thirteen it is still pretty high over fifty two billion dollars and it is expected to stay at that level at least until two thousand and seventeen and just to our viewers to make it clear it is pretty much the same or similar to what the united states was standing on their own intelligence at the height all of the cold war and. i'm sure you know that these and zorbas and spending on the part of the soviet union was one of the main reasons for its o

the united states to be neutral and then because of these treaty commitments the united states may find itself having to do something that it really doesn't want to do go ahead john. as you point out the united states you know professes to be neutral it is kind of secured its position in the asia pacific region as a so-called honest broker and so it has tried to do this at the same time of course it has allies so it's very difficult for the united states to actually be an honest broker when it supplies south korea with tremendous amount of military so. court as i said surpass supported japan for some time provides taiwan with a great deal of military support so the honest broker position is actually rather difficult and yet at the same time we have seen china and japan as well as china and some of the countries bordering the south china sea come to some agreements for instance over oil and gas exploration under sea and these agreements i think could be the kind of core of some agreement in the future one of those agreements was just back in two thousand and eight around the cock while n

states is for islamic extremists and so i think the united states citizens have gotten what they've paid for when they because we've been able to for you all and prevent numerous attacks on the continental united states and in europe with some of our allies because we're spending so much more money on intelligence and because we're able to have a more capable intelligence service going after threats to our country well you just mentioned nine eleven and that was of course twelve years ago but if we consider the. funding that the cia has requested of the intelligence community or rather has requested for the fiscal year of two thousand and thirteen it is still pretty high over fifty two billion dollars and it is expected to stay at that level at least until two thousand and seventeen and just to our viewers to make it clear it is pretty much the same or similar to what the united states was spending on their own intelligence ad they hide all of the cold war and. i'm sure you know that these and zorbas and standing on the part of the soviet union was one of the main reasons for its ow

of a genuine two state solution well obviously the united states in other example is iran now there is the nonproliferation treaty to which most states in the world have signed on with the exception of. us close u.s. ally israel but. part of the u. nonproliferation treaty is that states this nuclear. power states help other states that non-nuclear weapon states to develop their peaceful use of nuclear energy well that part of the nonproliferation treaty has been abandoned and is there the united states. leads a kind of a campaign to prevent iran the peaceful use of nuclear energy which is supposedly nonproliferation treaty and little about georgia saying if i go back to majeed in tampa is that you know the international community the term international community is george is applying it here is really the washington consensus isn't it . i think that's a great point that. i think we're raising i think it's again depends on the context that we're using and we have to define and really know to be able to build up with upon our arguments i think i think the international community from

of a genuine two state solution well obviously the unite. that stays in other example is iran now there is the nonproliferation treaty to which most states in the world have signed on with the exception of. us close u.s. ally israel but part of the u. nonproliferation treaty is that states this nuclear. power states help other states the non-nuclear weapon states to develop their peaceful use of nuclear energy well that part of the nonproliferation treaty has been abandoned and it's there that the united states. leads a kind of a campaign to prevent iran the peaceful use of nuclear energy which is what is supposedly nonproliferation treaty and little about georgia saying if i go back to majeed in tampa is that you know the international community the term international community is george is applying it here is really the washington consensus isn't it . i think that's a great point that. i think we're raising i think it's again depends on the context that we're using and we have to define it really no order to be able to build up upon our ar

important inare the united states. they become real connectors between brazil and the united states. one well-known company that has five subsidiaries in the united states. they are here because this is a big market, but this is also a place of innovation. i wanted to just remember something president dilma rousseff said exactly one year ago in her last interview of 2012. she was asked about this business of the fiscal cliff that the united states was going down. not manage their fiscal affairs and govern themselves. she said, i don't believe that the united states is losing importance in the world. quote, as ist a read this so many times. then she said, the united states ana country with extraordinarily flexible economy , with a great capacity to reinvent itself. -- united states is moving is the country of innovation and is something that she says, value very much, and we have to pay attention to. she repeated four times the word "education." there is a debate in the united states about the quality of education, but

states now safety united states doesn't change its policies toward cuba and these countries are just not going to go along with the united states has put it's symptomatic as part of a broader international lessening of u.s. influence we see what's happening in the middle east crisis can really. influence these situations are war making we've got this powerful military the most powerful military in the history of humanity and it doesn't work since world war two you look at korea you look at vietnam you look at afghanistan you look at iraq i mean we can we can invade grenada and we can defeat a couple dozen cuban construction workers and reagan can go on television saying it's morning again in america at the united states is back that stand proud but this the military solutions don't work to any of these problems even in libya situation there is falling apart we need some we need to rethink how we approach the world as much joy and really truly joy and not as a dominant partner but as a co-equal border and that would really take an active enormous mental your military and i don't know

states is not for export but you also say that united states and the west will collapse in the same way rogue is from uncontrolled multiculturalism do you not believe in a positive effects of globalization. listen to there's no doubt that globalization has some tremendously positive. aspects to it and consequences from it i think that the fact that the chinese people for example. where i visited china with richard nixon it is opening to china i was part of that delegation. it was a deeply repressed country poverty was pandemic it was a dreary as dreary a places i've ever seen and i think globalization is in large part responsible for the enormous build up of china the fact that there's widespread wealth in china there's enormous production it is grown it ten percent twelve percent eight percent a year for twenty twenty five years that's a good thing my concern about globalization is the american economy america was the most productive nation in the world a tremendous manufacturing power when i ran for president in one thousand nine hundred two i said if we go into these trade treati

states now safety united states doesn't change its policies toward cuba and these countries are just not going to go along with the united states has put it's symptomatic as part of a broader international lessening of u.s. influence we see what's happening in the middle east and i say can really influence these situations are war making we've got this powerful military the most powerful military in the history of humanity and it doesn't work since world war two you look at korea you look at vietnam you look at afghanistan you look at iraq i mean we we can we can invade grenada and we can defeat a couple dozen cuban construction workers and reagan can go on television saying it's morning again in america the united states is back and standing proud but this the military solutions don't work to any of these problems even in libya situation there is falling apart we need some we need to rethink how we approach the world as much joy and really truly joy and not as a dominant partner but as we would. take an active enormous middle you believe and i don't know president can we know that o

states now safety united states doesn't change its policies toward cuba and these countries are just not going to go along with the united states has put it's symptomatic it's part of a broader international lessening of u.s. influence we see what's happening in the middle east and i say can really influence these situations are war making we've got this powerful military the most powerful military in the history of humanity and it doesn't work since world war two you look at korea you look at vietnam you look at afghanistan you look at iraq i mean we we can invade grenada and we can defeat a couple dozen cuban construction workers and reagan can go on television saying it's morning again in america at the united states is back and standing proud but this the military solutions don't work to any of these problems even in libya situation there is falling apart we need some we need to rethink how we approach the world as much joy and really there's a dominant partner but it. would really take an act of enormous mental you milly and i don't know the president could we have no. idea beca

states is for islamic extremists and so i think the united states citizens have gotten what they've paid for when they because we've been able to for you all and prevent numerous attacks on the continental united states and in europe with some of our allies because we're spending so much more money on intelligence and because we're able to have a more capable intelligence service going after threats to our country well you just mentioned nine eleven and that was of course twelve years ago but if we consider the. funding that the cia has requested of the intelligence community or rather has requested for the fiscal year of two thousand and thirteen it is still pretty high for fifty two billion dollars and it is expected to stay at that level at. least until two thousand and seventeen and just to our viewers to make it clear it is pretty much the same or similar to what the united states was standing on there and intelligence at the high all of the cold war and. i'm sure you know that this and saw that and standing on the part of the soviet union was one of the main reasons for its ow

it is really a digger in november and doors to the security deed that the united states. but as i said you might not sign it and opted to keep snakes keep it. today has addicted to the united states and its allies which want to get going with them for this one a not for the training mission that is to stay on and have done is done up to two thousand fourteen the most footing troops that have been battling the table and said it's been half was down. katie has to be outdone government decided to secure edd its own a dog lead to unsafe display like he was backed by owning up to a foot in the distance the agreement it has been endorsed and we believe it will be not only that he wants an agreement to be signed between france and united states. a good time but our focus right now is on assurances. and that we are seeking when it comes to the two topics i mentioned our peace efforts. and putting a stop to the medicare patients against applicants are the odds of a desolate set is designed to safely cybersecurity not seen fit to do so could jeopardize of gun security and up to eig

this is a critically important region in the united states. and the key factor is central in this policy is china's rise and how the united states will manage china's rise going forward. >> how does china's rise look, camille, when you're standing in manila. is the country looking to tighten itself to the united states because a politically , powerful china makes it feel insecure? >> you can see that the philippines may be insecure, but we are just admitting that our military capabilities are limited, and it's challenged, and so having the united states there as a key ally, one of our oldest allies, really, gives us more confidence. facing china, however, we see--we look at it as david versus goliath. we have elevated the government has elevated the case through the al jazeera america arbitration course through the hague, there is a case there right now on the south china sea dispute. having the united states support this measurement is something that the people really appreciate, the public and the government, that they have a backer some how

states is not for export but you also sap that united states and the west will collapse in the same way rogue is from uncontrolled multiculturalism do you not believe in the positive effects of globalization. we're listening to there's no doubt that globalization has some tremendously positive. aspects to it and consequences from it i think that the fact that the chinese people for example. where i visited china with richard nixon it is opening to china i was part of that delegation. it was a deeply repressed country poverty was pandemic it was a dreary as dreary a places i've ever seen and i think globalization is in large part responsible for the enormous build up of china the fact that there's widespread wealth in china there's enormous production it is growing it ten percent twelve percent eight percent a year for twenty twenty five years that's a good thing my concern about globalization is the american economy america was the most productive nation in the world a tremendous manufacturing power when i ran for president in one thousand nine hundred two i said if we go into these

united states so there are no position to talk about other leaders are leaders of the united states president can execute anyone anywhere any time and does so how can we talk about bashar al assad seriously and say that this man is a problem and that and they will talk about it and that's the right listens to the american president that's that's the difference they will talk about if they keep talking about it that's that was still a purpose of why they why until i started out because they were supposedly human rights violations in syria but we can talk about what the point that i'm making is that the u.s. president has given himself the authority to execute anyone anywhere any time for any pretext any bogus reason is that more of a problem to the world than bashar al assad of course it is it's much more of a problem that the president of the united states says he can execute anyone anywhere any time and yet we're sitting here talking about bashar al assad which granted this man has committed crimes in syria there's no question of that but when we look at the u.s. president when we

states is not for export but you also say that united states and the west will collapse in the same way rogue is from uncontrolled multiculturalism do you not believe in a positive effects of globalization. when listening to there's no doubt that globalization has some tremendously positive. aspects to it and consequences from it i think that the fact that the chinese people for example. where i visited china with richard nixon it is opening to china i was part of that delegation. it was a deeply repressed country poverty was pandemic it was a dreary as dreary a places i've ever seen and i think globalization is in large part responsible for the enormous build up of china the fact that there's widespread wealth in china there's enormous production it is grown it ten percent twelve percent eight percent a year for twenty twenty five years that's a good thing my concern about globalization is the american economy america was the most productive nation in the world a tremendous manufacturing power when i ran for president in one thousand nine hundred two i said if we go into these trad

as the united states has adjusted to the fiscal realities that we have in the united states but i think it's been money very well spent i don't think it's been exorbitant whatsoever we are a big country like russia where we have a global intelligence service because we have interests all over the world we have more threats you know i think it's interesting it might be interesting for your viewers you know the way the united states sees intelligence is different than when we saw it in the cold war while the soviet union and the united states were sort of pitted against each other in a sense it was an easier intelligence mission because russia is a very large of the soviet union was a very large nation state within embassies and armaments and the rest whereas today's threats are stateless international terrorists they are political writers of weapons of mass destruction so the intelligence job is a little bit harder here today in the post cold war era than arguably it might have been in the cold war absolutely mr allen this is a good point but you just mentioned russia and russia is also

the united states to be neutral and then because of these treaty commitments the united states may find itself having to do something that it really doesn't want to do go ahead john. as you point out the united states you know professes to be neutral it is kind of secured its position in the asia pacific region as a so-called honest broker and so it has tried to do this at the same time of course it has allies so it's very difficult for the united states to actually be an honest broker when it supplies south korea with tremendous amount of military so. court as i said surpass supported japan for some time provides taiwan with a great deal of military support so the honest broker position is actually rather difficult and yet at the same time we have seen china and japan as well as china and some of the countries bordering the south china sea come to some agreements for instance over oil and gas exploration under sea and these agreements i think could be the kind of core of some agreement in the future one of those agreements was just back in two thousand and eight around that. and we've

the united states to be neutral and then because of these treaty commitments the united states may find itself having to do something that it really doesn't want to do go ahead john. as you point out the united states you know professes to be neutral it is kind of secured its position in the asia pacific region as a so-called honest broker and so it has tried to do this at the same time of course it has allies so it's very difficult for the united states to actually be an honest broker when it supplies south korea with tremendous amount of military so. court as i said spasm port in japan for some time provides taiwan with a great deal of military support so the honest broker position is actually rather difficult and yet at the same time we have seen china and japan as well as china and some of the countries bordering the south china sea come to some agreements for instance over oil and gas exploration under sea and these agreements i think could be the kind of core of some agreement in the future one of those agreements was just back in two thousand and eight around that. and we've seen

states has adjusted to the fiscal realities that we have in the united states but i think it's been money very well spent i don't think it's been exorbitant whatsoever we are a big country like russia where we have a global intelligence service because we have interests all over the world we have more threats you know i think it's interesting it might be interesting for your viewers you know the way the united states. sees intelligence is different than when we saw it in the cold war while the soviet union and the united states were sort of pitted against each other in a sense it was an easier intelligence mission because russia is a very large or the soviet union was a very large nation state within embassies and armaments in the rest whereas today's threats are stateless international terrorists they are political writers of weapons of mass destruction so the intelligence job is a little bit harder here today in the post cold war era than arguably it might have been in the cold war absolutely mr allen this is a good point but you just mentioned russia and russia is also a target f

the united states so there are no position to talk about other leaders are leaders of the united states president can execute anyone anywhere anytime and does so how can we talk about bashar al assad seriously and say that this man is a problem and that our talk about it and that's the right to listen is to american president that's that's the difference they will talk about it they keep talking about it that's that was still a purpose of why they why until i started out because there were supposedly human rights violations in syria but we can talk about what the point that i'm making is that the us president has given himself the authority to execute anyone anywhere any time for any pretext any bogus reason is that more of a problem to the world than bashar al assad of course it is it's much more of a problem that the president of the united states says he can execute anyone anywhere any time and yet we're sitting here talking about bashar al assad which granted this man has committed crimes in syria there's no question of that but when we look at the u.s. president when we look at isr

the united states to be neutral and then because of these treaty commitments the united states may find itself having to do something that it really doesn't want to do go ahead john. as you point out the united states you know professes to be neutral it is kind of secured its position in the asia pacific region as a so-called honest broker and so it has tried to do this at the same time of course it has allies so it's very difficult for the united states to actually be an honest broker when it supplies south korea with a tremendous amount of military so. court as i said surpass supported japan for some time provides taiwan with a great deal of military support so the honest broker position is actually rather difficult and yet at the same time we have seen china and japan as well as china and some of the countries bordering the south china sea come to some agreements for instance over oil and gas exploration under sea and these agreements i think could be the kind of core of some agreement in the future one of those agreements was just back in two thousand and eight around the. island an

states does embody the nation in a certain way and if the nation sees itself the united states as a masculine entity which it has been for since its inception dominated by white men then women have a really up hill road to climb so when a woman is trying to present herself or to be taken seriously you can expect that she's going to be cut down or some people are going to try to cut her down because she doesn't measure up to that standard which has been defined as very masculine standards and in the book you also argue that certain policies are pursued by politicians because they appeal to white men can you elaborate on what these specific policies are and what tactics each party uses to appeal to the group. well i mean this whole i. this whole language of tough on crime tough on terrorism strong on foreign policy and national defense all this all gender and language that suggests that what we need is a is a strong man whose or person but certainly man is the assumption is the default assumption will be who will be willing to use force to establish or maintain our control in the worl

states not against the united states it's the united states and the saudis had the same goal in syria which was to overthrow the assad government now you see because of a possible shift in that way the united states is approaching the middle east but saudi arabia fears isolation they really cannot carry out in independent foreign policy because of their regimes limited strength endure a billet it fears an islamic revolution or a secular revolution it fears isolation and now it's now it looks as if it's primarily the ally of israel i mean you can't look for a worst outcome for a regime in the arab world mark replied to that because it does look like a tell of the axis now developing and there's been lots of sound and fury that they could collectively could attack iran if the united states and western powers continue their dialogue with iran go ahead. well first of all i want to say agree with the first part of what brian had to say with regard to the fact that yes the third is migrant workers yes they're paying off people with oil wealth but the idea that saudi arabia is somehow a clie

the united states was going down. affairs. said, i junot believe the united states is losing importance in the world. this is -- she said, i do not believe the united states is losing importance in the world. a country dates is with an extraordinarily flexible economy with a great capacity to invent -- reinvent itself. the united states has something that i value very much and that we have to pay attention to. she repeated 4 times the word "education." there is a debate about the quality of education. what it requires, what will leadership here and there to make those interests. this is an cleanly out of order because i am not supposed to be saying any of this. >> ambassador, it is a pleasure to have you with us. you give such a coherent presentation. i know you choose your words carefully. i want to do address this phrase to a dress this phrase of the disclosure problem. probably one of the only people in the room who has sued the u.s. government for warrantless --e type -- wire type wiretapping. we could not prove standing.

united states so there are no position to talk about other leaders are leaders of the united states president can execute anyone anywhere anytime and does so how can we talk about bashar al assad seriously and say that this man is a problem to talk about it acts and the right to listen is to american president that's that's the difference they will talk about if they keep talking about it that's that was still whole purpose of why they why until i started out because they were supposedly human rights violations in syria but we can talk about what the point that i'm making is that the us president has given himself the authority to execute anyone anywhere any time for any pretext any bogus reason it's because that more of a problem to the world than bashar al assad of course it is it's much more of a problem that the president of the united states says he can execute anyone anywhere any time and yet we're sitting here talking about bashar al assad which granted this man is committed crimes in syria there's no question of that but when we look at the u.s. president when we look at isr

united states has never signed on to that the mine bans united states and signed on to that so when we actually look at these various international agreements we can talk about all sorts of like the covenant of the social economic cultural rights again you know united states never signed on to that you know we actually find that here could be said to be the you will of the international community but we find that the self-appointed spokesman of community haven't actually signed on to these important agreements you want to jump in there . yeah i think a few days ago i was usually follow the news also from not only from the west and also news outlets but from the eastern one and i use the term international community is used in the if you in the iranian. media particularly press t.v. or so it's being used to really i think you can say loosely across the board but again i think. i think the term is without that is a western concept which was you can say a post-war war to legacy. which basically i think there are different here branches and we have to focus on again if you are talking a

states now safety united states doesn't change its policies toward cuba and these countries are just not going to go along with the united states has put it's symptomatic as part of a broader international lessening of u.s. influence we see what's happening in the middle east can really influence the situations are war making we've got this powerful military the most powerful military in the history of humanity and it doesn't work since world war two you look at korea you look at vietnam you look at afghanistan you look at iraq i mean we we can we can invade grenada and we can defeat a couple dozen cuban construction workers and reagan could go on television saying it's morning again in america the united states is back and standing proud but this the military solutions don't work to any of these problems even the libya situation there is falling apart. we need some we need to rethink how we approach the world as model and join it really truly join it not as a dominant partner but as a co-equal partner and that would really take an active enormous mental your military and i don't kno

so one of the characteristics of the united states is that here we, the united states does not have price control for drugs, so this creates a lot of problems. and the fact that people because of the baby boom generation and also the increasing longevity, it is also atexting the health care system. -- affecting the health care system. so before obama signed the health care act, there was about 46%, 46 million americans without health insurance. so that has created a lot of pressures in order to cover those people, and so the point of the obamacare would be to reduce those amounts. but this is very complex, and i will get a little bit into that. so one of the other issues that the united states has as a limitation is that there are many unhealthy habits here in terms of food, lack of exercise, and all of those things have an impact. even stress, too, have an imact in the quality of -- impact in the quality of the life of people. what happens is when it comes to 65, many people have to suffer a lo hot of chronic ailments because of those issues. so in this table where as we could see here i

now it is central to my mission as a united states senator. and what i've learned over the last year is that despite all the rhetoric that we hear from the gun lobby, when you change gun laws to keep guns out of the hands of criminals and to take dangerous military-style weapons and ammunition off of the streets, guess what happens? communities become safer. and the data tells us this. since 1998, the national instant criminal background check system has blocked more than 2 million gun sales from prohibited purchasers. that's up to 2 million crimina criminals, people with criminal histories that should not have bought a gun that were prohibited from buying a gun. the background check system works but for the fact that only about 60% of gun purchases actually go through the system because more and more guns are being bought in on-line sales, more and more guns are being bought on-line, more and more guns are being bought at gun shows. we know that background checks work because we've stopped 2 million people who would be prohibited from owning

states then you should say that it was led by a small group of countries led by the united states and i want to say it was the international community just like in the case of yugoslavia it was nato that bombed yugoslavia and he was again it was a policy that was pushed by a few of the nato powers so you have no real real business deeming this somehow the will in the actions of the international community as well as a kind of there's dishonesty in the use of this international community there is no way that you can actually arrogated solve international community when you only represent a very small group of self interest that powers ok georgia and i'd like to clarify here when we look at libya not even all members of nato participated in that operation so it's even less than what nato was i'm certain members of nato mind you but if i go to talk about iran because it seems like the international community if you look at it at the term beyond the washington consensus is very much in support of iran's position on having civilian nuclear power but if you look at the israeli position obvi

states not against the united states it's the united states and the saudis had the same goal and syria would remit now you see because of a possible shift in that way the united states is approaching the middle east but saudi arabia fears isolation they really cannot carry out in independent foreign policy because of their regimes limited strength and dura billet it fears an islamic revolution or a secular revolution it fears isolation and now it's now it looks as if it's primarily the ally of israel i mean you can't look for a worst outcome for a regime in the arab world mark replied to that because it does look like a tell of the axis now developing and there's been lots of sound and fury that they could collectively could attack iran if the united states and western powers continue their dialogue with iran go ahead. well first of all i want to say i agree with the first part of what brian had to say with regard to the fact that yes the third is migrant workers yes they're paying off people with oil wealth but the idea that saudi arabia is somehow a client state of the united states

of life in the united states. whereas the keystone x.l. pipeline would provide short and long-term employment opportunities and related labor income benefits such as government revenues associated with taxes. whereas the state of nebraska has thoroughly approved and reviewed the proposed keystone x.l. pipeline reroute concluding the concerns of nebraskans have had a major influence on the pipeline reroute and that the reroute will have minimal environmental impact. whereas the department of state and other federal agencies have conducted extensive studies and analysis over a long period of time on the technical environmental, social and economic impact of the proposed keystone x.l. pipeline. whereas assessments by the department of state found that the keystone x.l. pipeline is not likely to impact the amount of crude oil produced from the oil sands and that approval or denial of the proposed project is unlikely to have a substantial impact on the rate of development in the oil sands. whereas the department of sta

incidentally united states and the e.u. think there is a historic opportunity to resolve the conflict. in such a way that the palestinians are left with virtually nothing ok so ryan so what kind of agreement is that how can you have an agreement like that with no justice. i honestly don't believe this top side going anywhere and i think they're intended to go anywhere it's just lip service if you look as mr obama's speech in two thousand and eleven where he actually mansion. and the nine hundred sixty seven borders with some swaps it was intended for the palestinians not to ask for recognition at the united nations and after that mr netanyahu came to the united states and i'm sure your viewers would know that congress has far more powers or is the most powerful branch of the u.s. government he came and here dress the united states congress in fourteen minutes he got twenty nine standing ovations in which he categorically refuse to recognize those boundaries and i think it's very important to understand that there's long as

states now safety united states doesn't change its policies toward cuba and these countries are just not going to go along with the united states has put it's symptomatic it's part of a broader international lessening of u.s. influence we see what's happening in the middle east and i say can really influence these situations are war making we've got this powerful military the most powerful military in the history of humanity and it doesn't work since world war two you look at korea you look at vietnam you look at afghanistan you look at iraq i mean we we can we can invade grenada and we can defeat a couple dozen cuban construction workers and reagan could go on television saying it's morning again in america at the united states is back and standing proud but this military solutions don't work to any of these problems even in libya situation there is falling apart we need some we need to rethink how we approach the world as much joy and really truly truly not as the dominant partner but as a co-equal border and that would really take an act of enormous middle you believe and i don't

states not against the united states it's the united states and the saudis had the same goal in syria which was to overthrow the assad government now you see because of a possible shift in that way the united states is approaching the middle east but saudi arabia fears isolation they really cannot carry out in independent foreign policy because of their regimes limited strengthened your ability it fears an islamic revolution or a secular revolution it fears isolation and now it's now it looks as if it's primarily the ally of israel i mean you can't look for a worst outcome for a regime in the arab world mark replied to that because it does look like you tell of the axis now developing and there's been lots of sound and fury that they could collectively could attack iran if the united states and western powers continue their dialogue with iran go ahead. well first of all i want to say agree with the first part of what brian had to say with regard to the fact that yes the third is migrant workers yes they're paying off people with oil wealth but the idea that saudi arabia is somehow a c

their united states senators and their governor. well, let me move on to something far more serious, and i'm going to talk about obamacare, too. and i'm going to tie that in with what i believe this process that we're going through relating to our constitutional right to advise and consent the president of the united states when it comes to his appointments, i'm going to tie that in to why i believe that has all happened and why we find ourselves here today because of this failed obamacare system. yesterday when i was on the floor, i talked at some length about the history of filibuster changes. i mentioned that i have a tremendous amount of respect for a senator that passed not all that long ago, served in this body for a long time, probably knew this body better than anybody who ever served in the history of the senate. that would be senator bob byrd. came here and he was in failing health by the time i arrived in the senate just about five years ago, but what a -- what a wonderful man. got to know him a little bit. we actually pa

the fbi had rounded up almost all agents operating with the united states. however, hitler was very unhappy with the job being done by his intelligence service, the abwehr, and pressured admiral kanaris, his intelligence chief, do something more dramatic. the result was an operation called pastorius in which eight germans who had lived in the united states, two of whom had been us citizens, and--men who had gone back to germany, were recruited to form this team. they were put ashore in the united states via submarine in the summer of 1942 to carry out espionage. one of them decided to rat on his other comrades, thinking this would make him a hero. this--and--and--and so they were all quickly rounded up. this story is--is fairly well-known. what is far less known was roosevelt's attitude towards these saboteurs. he immediately directs his attorney general, francis biddle, to organize the trial outside of the civilian courts through a military tribunal. and he said to biddle, in effect, 'these are agents of the enemy. they've come ashore in wartime th--in civi

the united states was the good guy. rouhani is nothing the taxing trek on the united states. he is tweeting rosh hashanah, greetings to the jewish people. his foreign minister is extremist sophisticated and charming. they are putting forward proposals that are clearly constructed and flexible. they are serious about diplomacy. in the last rounds of negotiation, about the day was spent on just deciding when and where will the next meeting be. the iranians made suggestions such as kabul, because clearly kabul is a safe place to negotiate. [laughter] and they were playing games like this about everything. everything was a negotiation. now it takes about five minutes to decide this. the venue is already sent. it will always be geneva. the only thing is that they combine their schedule. so now there is no excuse. the iranians are really trying, that is the impression on the international scene. that has translated into a lot of countries who have agreed to these sanctions and have agreed to them very grudgingly because ultimately they don't like to be in the bad economic situation

with the united states. look for a way to accommodate this new global interest. and, finally, i noted that while brazil and the united states have been friendly, there's been a certain polite distance both of us ar were going about our business but increasingly we have seen more connectivity between our societies and between our peoples that was going to affect ultimately our diplomacy and our foreign policy towards each other. and that with time our societies and peoples ar were going to bee the principal drivers of our relationship and not our governments. i would argue that i was right in all of those assertions. and that if anything else, my nearly four years in brazil had convinced me that they are still valid, and actually very still much alive in shaping the u.s.-brazil relationship. although brazil has seen its own fair share of internal political effervescence last june with the many demonstrations we saw across brazil, from our point of view this as evidence of the health of brazilian democracy and

a suspicion arose in the united states that some foreign countries were using exports to the united states as a means of promoting the domestic growth of their own economies. they were flooding us with their goods while keeping ours out. this suspicion were based on the existence of very high tariffs abroad, it would be fairly easy to evaluate. unfortunately, most of the obstacles that countries place in the way of foreign imports are more subtle than that, what economists call "non-tariff barriers" to trade. government subsidies, as in the case of steel, are sometimes overt, sometimes hidden and complex. complicated licensing and import procedures, special regulations concerning the standards, specifications, and testing that imported products have to meet. the magnitude of such barriers is very difficult to assess. what can be said with some confidence is that countries who are running huge trade surpluses with the united states, like japan, should take quite seriously the effort to open their economies to american goods as much as they can. for the alternative is very likely to be incre

new that the united states of america was his land. this young corporal was just a boy, a high school student, when he enlisted. native americans, like the corporal, were so eager to serve that many lied about their age to enlist. these brave soldiers, these code talkers had a special gift, their special -- sacred languages, and they selflessly shared that gift with our country, their country. their gifts saved countless lives and helped win the war, and their willingness to share it made them american heroes -- share it made them american heroes. we honor our american heroes today. [applause] >> ladies and the speaker of the united states house of representatives, the honorable john boehner. [applause] >> thank you. i want to say thank you to my colleagues for their testimonials, and of course all of those in mid-december the possible. we are now going to present the medals -- made this ceremony possible. we are going to present the medals, and i am asking you to hold your applause until the end so that we can give all of our honorees

ardent opponents of a genuine two state solution well obviously the united states in other example is iran now there is the nonproliferation treaty to which most states in the world have signed on with the exception of you with us close u.s. ally israel but part of the you nonproliferation treaty is that states this nuclear. power states help other states the non-nuclear weapon states to develop their peaceful use of nuclear energy well that part of the nonproliferation treaty has been abandoned and it's there the united states. leads a kind of a campaign to prevent iran the peaceful use of nuclear energy which is supposedly nonproliferation treaty and little about georgia saying if i go back to majeed in tampa is that you know the international community the term international community is george is applying it here is really the washington consensus isn't it . i think that's a great point i think. i think we're raising i think it's again depends on the context that we're using and we have to define it really no order to be able to build up with upon our arguments i think i think the

knew that the united states of america was his land. this young corporal was just a boy, a high school student, when he enlisted. native americans, like the corporal, were so eager to serve that many lied about their age to enlist. these brave soldiers, these code talkers had a special gift, their sacred languages, and they selflessly shared that gift with our country, their country. their gifts saved countless lives and helped win the war, and their willingness to share it made them american heroes -- share it made them american heroes. we honor our american heroes today. [applause] >> ladies and the speaker of the united states house of representatives, the honorable john boehner. [applause] >> thank you. i want to say thank you to my colleagues for their testimonials, and of course all of those in mid-december the possible. we are now going to present the medals -- made this ceremony possible. we are going to present the medals, and i am asking you to hold your applause until the end so that we can give all of our honorees their prop

because marijuana use was almost unheard of in the united states. that's why it seems very strange that california passed one of the first anti marijuana laws in 1913. >> you read the newspapers from 1913 or before you will find almost no mention of cannabis or hashish or indian ham. the world marijuana was unknown. >> reporter: henry j. finger spear headed the first anti marijuana law. >> it was his idea that california's anti narcotics law should be as simple as possible. >> reporter: lawmakers were concerned about immigrants from india that were known to smoke marijuana. the fear is now that they are initiating our whites into this habit. the fear heightened more as the revolution sent many immigrants to the united states. in fact, many of the early anti drug laws that states and cities task seemed tied to the fear of foreigners. for example, san francisco enacted the first anti narcotics law in the united states in 1875. outlawing opium bins. >> it was directed very specific at the chinese. >> reporter: authorities made a display of destroying o

is the united states dumb privilege and it was done in the public has to realize it can't just by . just throw it away. for instance belongs to the united states environmental protection agency i found this on a dump site here this is their computer it's not always alone on the producers of these little i have to look at these though i believe the vision responsible for the products from cradle to grave. paid off to mexico to comment on mental health property will south america incorporated all but also belongs to the washington metro area transit authority properties of a dentist aids page trend and trademark office. with me to an economic crisis all over the world and france deserves to get out of the crisis and deserve to have back all the people who are leaving the country to go and work in other places and it's very sad to see that it's really like that like a lamb was no light. we speak your language or not of the. news programs and documentaries and spanish matters to you breaking news a little turn to angles stories. you hear. all teach spanish find out more visit. welcome b

states is for islamic extremists and so i think the united states citizens have gotten what they've paid for when they because we've been able to for you all and prevent numerous attacks on the continental united states and in europe with some of our allies because we're spending so much more money on intelligence and because we are able to have a more capable and.